This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.

Friday, March 11, 2016

Relevance for the present campaign?

“The vice I am talking of is Pride or Self-Conceit: and the virtue opposite to it, in Christian morals, is called Humility...According to Christian teachers, the essential vice, the utmost evil, is Pride. Unchastity, anger, greed, drunkenness, and all that, are mere flea bites in comparison: it was through Pride that the devil became the devil: Pride leads to every other vice: it is the complete anti-God state of mind.”

24 comments:

In this excellent article (http://bitterempire.com/presidential-candidates-ranked-usefulness-bar-fight/), the writer describes why Trump is the second worst person to have on your side in a bar fight:

"Another big talker who prefers that other people take the consequences of his barreling around. It’s baffling that so many of Trump’s fans still think he’s a tough guy when everyone who has been in so much as a playground dustup knows that anyone who feels the need for that much bluster is going to fold like a paper crane once an actual fight starts. Trump is going to be a screamer, a cryer, and a bleeder. He’s also going to be the guy who immediately starts shouting “No fair!” and tries to get everyone to stop the fight and start over because of some bullshit rule he just made up like everybody was supposed to take their jackets off first, and if they won’t stop, the win doesn’t really count. / Trump is going to howl bloody murder the second someone lands the first punch on him — which will be instantly — and he’s going to be out the back way almost immediately after Cruz. / The best you can hope for is that he won’t be able to resist insulting the kitchen staff and gets his ass kicked on the way out. / He’s going to break into a run as soon as they belt-and-ear hurl him out the door, and he’ll be on television recounting his made-up heroics while you’re still getting punched by some biker who’s wearing an enormous signet ring. Do not have Donald Trump on your side in a bar fight."

I also am dumbfounded by Evangelical and even Catholic support for Trump, a man who proudly boasts of his serial adulteries, has built much of his fortune on encouraging sin in others (e.g., his casinos), insulted the Sacraments, professed no need for forgiveness for anything he's done, befouled our political discourse with crude language and personal insult, incited violence against those who disagree with him, mocked persons with disabilities or on the basis of their appearance, demeaned women and minorities, besmirched the reputation of an unquestionable war hero (whose bootstraps Trump is unworthy to tie), is an absolute phony when it comes to his supposed pro-life stand, is a complete hypocrite when it comes to hiring illegal aliens and shipping jobs overseas (both of which he has done), is a finger-in-the-wind opportunist as to his stances on various issues or his party affiliation, and whose leadership style resembles nothing so much as an American Vladimir Putin.

Really? I don't care how much you might agree with specific things Trump might be saying. Just look at the man.

Here is one Catholic Christian who will not be supporting Trump this (or any other) year.

I also am dumbfounded by Evangelical and even Catholic support for Trump...

I think the church has a problem. A lot of them have cultivated the Reagan stuff so long they don't remember the gospel. They really think it's about being conservative. I started seeing people on message boards reflecting this concern about sometime in the first term of Obama. At first I thought it was joust the effect of responding to atheist ridicule that polarized statements and made them seem that way. Then I started actually trying to discuss it and found a good many who were doing apologetics actually thought belief in inerrancy and against evolution were as important to being saved as faith in the resurrection.

The nature of my business puts me in contact with a wide verity of people. I usually avoid politics and other emotional topics with my clients. This year, it's been a lot of fun to just throw out, "so, what do you think of Donald Trump?" Most everybody has an opinion and I enjoy listening to their thoughts.

There is this frequent grim satisfaction among his supporters of people's unease about The Donald. If you are one of those bewildered, frightened, or angry about the prospect of a Trump presidency, there are a whole lot of people who are happy you are.

yes but they are stupid. those are the kind of people who make snide comments about traffic wrecks. the core of Trump's support is what Marx called the lumpen proletariat. what we might call "red necks." I don't care what they think. Most of them are uneducated they are nuts. violent, narrow mimed, silly.

the core of Trump's support is what Marx called the lumpen proletariat. what we might call "red necks." I don't care what they think. Most of them are uneducated they are nuts. violent, narrow mimed, silly.

Wow. What a load of condescension! I'm no Trump supporter (far from one, in fact), but if yours is the attitude of the Clintonistas or of those "feeling the Bern", then I can see why Trump is doing as well as he is.

You realize, Joe, that such language as yours is indistinguishable from how Dawkins, Harris, etc. describe Christians in general: "uneducated, nuts, violent, narrow minded, silly".

I don't care what [Trump supporters] think.

And I'll wager they return the favor.

(And by the way, before you start calling people uneducated, lumpenproletariat is one word. So is redneck.)

you are so deeply ideological that you can't even consider facts without an "ist" pr an "ism" t fight. One doesn't merely vote differently than you one becomes a "not-you-ist."

If the average evangelical was going around punching atheists just holding signs I would say Dawkkins and Harris were right. It's because there are great Christian thinkers like Paul Tillich and Reinhold Niebuhr. who they mock and ridicule that marks them as the sloppy thinkers they are/

"(And by the way, before you start calling people uneducated, lumpen proletariat is one word. So is redneck."

of course it is Sherlock. that's why I used it. I translated a lumpen into redneck and it fits. that's what a Lumpemn is. you could also say scum bags.

His demographic is largely uneducated .That is mot a mere insult I'm throwing out. It's a fact. learn the facts do research.

I'm not emotional about it. I'm not dispassionate but doesn't mean that I'm not thinking analytically about it. You and the "conservative" ideologies are thinking emotionally because you recoiling from the obviously reality that Trump is a fascist and he seeks to establish himself as strong man dictator. I don't see how anyone could expect anything else from a big businessman wheeler dealer type with billions of dollars.

"His demographic is largely uneducated " Trump is winning majorities in recent GOP primaries with all groups, including, yes, those with a college education.

"I think that many [Christian] conservatives have voted, and will vote, for Trump because it is the best way they know of to give the middle finger to the evil GOP". - Laurence M. Vance (Evangelical Christian)

The leftism and political "progressivism" of Reppert and other such Christians is what is truly not Christian.

The leftism and political "progressivism" of Reppert and other such Christians is what is truly not Christian.

I could not disagree more, Nick. I never like it when political partisans of any stripe attempt to claim Christ as "one of us". I believe Abraham Lincoln once answered a question about whether God was on the side of the North by saying something like "As to whether He's on our side, I can't say. But of far greater importance is, are we on His side?" (or words to that effect)

It always seems to me that whenever someone says you have to be a liberal or a conservative, a Republican or a Democrat, in order to be a True Christian that they're putting politics ahead of their faith. Were not the monarchists of past centuries good Christians? Were not the feudalists? Or the citizens of the Byzantine (East Roman) Empire? Or the advocates of a hundred other political systems? Insisting on an ideological litmus test for Christianity is just another form of chronological snobbery.

After last night's events in Chicago, it is now difficult to deny that Trump is pouring gasoline onto a fire already ablaze. God help us (I say that quite literally) if we do not come to our senses quickly, and call out this demagogue for what he is - a dangerous inciter of the worst instincts in the American public. It no longer matters whether or not he is "right" as to this or that position he has taken on immigration, trade, or whatever. What matters is his demeanor, his language, and yes, his personality. More Trump means more violence, more division, more hate.

I didn't always feel this way. I started out being amused (and, I confess, a bit intrigued) by Trump, then I thought he was probably harmless, but eventually I became uneasy. Now I am genuinely fearful. And mostly not of what he might do, but rather of what his supporters will do.

I now make this confident prediction. If Trump continues along the path he is now following, we'll see things that will make last night's incident in Chicago look like small beer indeed, and Trump will not own up to his share of the blame. What will it take to wake us up? Shots fired at a rally? Someone being clubbed or beaten to death? A full scale riot?

"His demographic is largely uneducated " Trump is winning majorities in recent GOP primaries with all groups, including, yes, those with a college education.

I think so far they have all been pluralities. He has not yet had a two man race. Even he does have republican majorities that still doesn't mean he's got the high end.

"I think that many [Christian] conservatives have voted, and will vote, for Trump because it is the best way they know of to give the middle finger to the evil GOP". - Laurence M. Vance (Evangelical Christian)

The leftism and political "progressivism" of Reppert and other such Christians is what is truly not Christian.

You know what I don't recognize your spiritual authority but I know someone who does the authority to say who is a Christian and who is not, that is St. Paul He tells us, It is written: "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse!" Gal 1:8

I am still waiting for passage that says being republican is necessary for salvation and that being a liberal negates it. Where is that found? That is another Gospel the one Paul preached says nothing about politics as condition of salvation.

The greatest danger to Christianity today is not Isiss and It's not atheism , it's Christians!

The leftism and political "progressivism" of Reppert and other such Christians is what is truly not Christian.

I could not disagree more, Nick. I never like it when political partisans of any stripe attempt to claim Christ as "one of us". I believe Abraham Lincoln once answered a question about whether God was on the side of the North by saying something like "As to whether He's on our side, I can't say. But of far greater importance is, are we on His side?" (or words to that effect)

good for man, I agree.

It always seems to me that whenever someone says you have to be a liberal or a conservative, a Republican or a Democrat, in order to be a True Christian that they're putting politics ahead of their faith. Were not the monarchists of past centuries good Christians? Were not the feudalists? Or the citizens of the Byzantine (East Roman) Empire? Or the advocates of a hundred other political systems? Insisting on an ideological litmus test for Christianity is just another form of chronological snobbery.

Nick writes: The leftism and political "progressivism" of Reppert and other such Christians is what is truly not Christian.

Joe writes: The greatest danger to Christianity today is not Isiss (sic) and It's not atheism , it's Christians!

For the life of me, I can find no substantive difference between those two statements. Both of you are claiming that fellow believers who disagree with you somehow fall short of being "genuine" Christians, solely on the basis of politics.

Now I am genuinely fearful. And mostly not of what he might do, but rather of what his supporters will do.

I am too. I am afraid that got something started that wont be stopped until disaster results.

There have always been small incidents of violence in campaigns. In 88 Dan Quayle came we protested outside with signs about central America. We did not go inside and there were no incidents. But some Dems went inside and they got pushed around and kicked out physically. But Quayle did not egg it on. He didn't say how he wanted to beat them up and all as Trump does.

The issue is disrupting a speech is wrong but there are degrees of disruption and degrees of response. The protesters against Trump have not gone over the line, but the Trump guy saying "if he comes back we have to kill him" that's way over the line. That is totally sick.

For the life of me, I can find no substantive difference between those two statements. Both of you are claiming that fellow believers who disagree with you somehow fall short of being "genuine" Christians, solely on the basis of politics.

Put on your thinking cap man. First of all I did not say all conservatives are a danger to Christianity. I didn't even say the danger is confined to the right wing. It's not. There are lots of leftists with whom I disagree. There are lots of leftist I think are a danger. Moreover I didn't say the people who are a danger are not Christians One can be a Christian and make a bad witness.

Christianity is a personal religion it has always been a matter of witness modeling by those who follow it, thus kit has always been in danger fro it's own members. If not for the Holy Spirit you know, none of us would give a witness.

Look at the refugee thing, We have to stop the refuses so we will be safe. Some trust in Chariots but we rust in the immigration department and homeland security. We should do what is right a and trust God to help us. what does the Bible say is perfect religion?

I am not unthanking you because your statement is a good start. It reminds we that we are brothers.

that should say reminds me. There are three things that govern my problem with spelling and writing.

(1) I really do have dyslexia

(2) I have problems seeing

(3) I'm lying down as I type. I was a coma for two months just one year ago. This summer I got back on the net, came out of it about march or April. I'm still in rehab. When I first went back on line I could barely think how to make a post. I could barely think to punch the buttons.I am trying to take more time to edit. My mind runs to fast for my fingers.

Followers

About Me

I am the author of C. S. Lewis's Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason, published by Inter-Varsity Press. I received a Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1989.